Building on the quotes from medical and biological texts posted below yesterday, there is a need to answer some common mischaracterizations of exactly what a human embryo and fetus is, and what it is not. Some fundamental biology will clear up the confusion.
A commenter on the post No Handicapped Allowed has this to say,
“If I were married, and my wife were pregnant, I would want to get the amnio test, but ultimately I would have to respect her choice if she declined. I would fully support her decision to abort if there were clear (not maybe 1%) evidence of Down’s syndrome, or particularly of anancephaly. I don’t think of that as killing a baby. I think of it as removing tissue that will grow into a baby with severe disabilities, or even with no brain at all. Again, if she declined, I would have to respect her decision. The body often spontaneous miscarries such tissue — I have no problem with human intervention if the body doesn’t recognize the problem in time.”
It’s an understandable position until one sees the developmental stages.
The commenter mentions amniocentesis and the baby at that stage being mere tissue that has potential to become a baby in the future.
Typically, amniocentesis is performed between 16-20 weeks of development. By then the baby has developed substantially with all of its organ systems in place. When the term ’tissue’ is tossed around, it is almost universally used incorrectly.
16 Weeks Photo: MedicineNet.com
A Primer On the Hierarchy of the Human Body’s Organizational Levels:
Cells. There are approximately 200 distinctly different types of cells that comprise the human body.
Tissues. Different types of cells aggregate to form specialized functions and are called tissues. The human body is comprised of four main tissue types: Epithelial, Connective, Muscle, Nerve.
Organs. These are composed of two or more tissue types to perform special functions. Examples: Stomach, intestines, pancreas, liver, heart, etc.
Organ Systems. These are two or more organs that act in a coordinated fashion to perform a common function. For example the digestive system is composed of several organs, including the stomach, pancreas, sall and large intestines, etc., whose coordinate function is the digestion and absorption of nutrients.
Organism. This is the whole and complete animal, made up of all the organ systems functioning as a coordinated whole.
20 Weeks Photo: MedicineNet.com
It must be stressed, however, that even in the single-celled stage of development, the zygotic stage, there exists a brand new human organism, whole and complete in form and function for that developmental stage.
The same holds true for every stage thereafter. That’s because even at the single-celled stage, the zygote is intrinsically ordered toward mature organismal development and is proceeding along that trajectory. At birth, the baby lacks full maturational development, and will not attain such until adulthood. This developmental reality renders all argument to the contrary an expression of whim, of personal desire, with no bearing on the biological reality of organismal development.
“The body often spontaneous miscarries such tissue — I have no problem with human intervention if the body doesn’t recognize the problem in time.”
It’s not that “the body” meaning of course, the woman’s body doesn’t recognize the “tissue” “problem”.
It’s that the “tissue” is a baby – so a normal situation for “the body” of a woman.
It’s that a woman’s body does not function in such a way that it always miscarries babies with genetic or physical disabilities.
In fact, I would argue that “the body” (of a woman) is designed to give “the tissue”, a baby every possible chance of survival.
Maybe because God knew that someday we might, through our God given intellect, discover ways to help those “problems”.
Wow, talk about using semantics to water everything down……
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jeff "Lew" Lewis, Not Abortion. Not Abortion said: Abortion Apologetics: It's More Than Cells and Tissue http://bit.ly/8ZsebO #abortion #prolife […]
A lot of these people don’t realize that by the time you are told that there could be a problem, you’ve already spent 20 minutes looking at very discernible hands, feet, heart, face, and brain and being told the sex of your tissue. And up to the point where the doctor says there could be a problem, the couple has probably been referring to the “mass of cells/tissue” as their baby.
I’m almost mid-way through my fourth pregnancy, and I’ve noticed that the testing “for problems” keeps getting pushed earlier and earlier. I can’t help wondering if this is so people can fool themselves easier and feel better about terminating a “mass of cells/tissue” that might not be 100% perfect. Never mind how unreliable most of the prenatal testing is.
It’s amazing what people can convince themselves of when they are ignorant, scared, and/or desperate.
The earlier the better, in my seldom humble opinion. Most parents, offered a choice PRIOR to conception, “Would you like your baby to be ravaged by rubella, blind, with imparied cognitive capacity, and partially crippled?” would of course say “No, I’ll take the healthy baby.” I can’t quite picture anyone, in that context, responding “Oh, but that’s unfair, there should be some rubella-ravaged babies in the world TOO. They have a RIGHT to be born, so some parents have to be brave and committed enough to accept them.”
However, parents don’t have that option. Parents don’t get to know WHETHER the fetus growing within the mother’s womb will be severely damaged, or have a genetic disease such as Down’s syndrome, until either an infection happens, or some tests can be done. It is quite natural, early in the process, to say, I don’t want to grow my baby from this diseased tissue. Take it out so I can start over.
Fifty years or more ago, parents couldn’t know much about this until after birth. Our culture and our laws have always protected babies delivered by live birth. Rightly so. If a person is born with disabilities, they are here, they have to make the best of it, and we try to accommodate the disability to help them make the best of it. But there is nothing good about the disability. If the person concerned could get the disability taken away, most would do so. Disabilities are a pain, they hamper the person who has one, they put an extra strain on their relations with others, however accepting and loving.
Roe v. Wade fully protects the legal right of any parent who, fully informed of the condition their baby will be born with, chooses to carry the pregnancy to term. No law, no intrusive government agency may forbid them to do so or require them to have an abortion. No argument that “this puts a burden on society” may trump the parent’s choice to take on this responsibility. But, it is also the option of any parent who finds it more humane to start over, to make that decision.
What it comes down to though is that either it’s a baby or it’s not. If it’s ok to kill what is very obviously a baby before birth because it definitely (or more often “might”) have a defect then why isn’t it ok to kill one at birth? What if the defect is caused buy an error or circumstance during delivery? Or why is it not ok to kill anyone else who becomes a burden? That is a rather slippery moral slope.
“Our culture and our laws have always protected babies delivered by live birth. ”
Well, until Roe v. Wade our culture and our laws did the same for those in the womb (except of course such societies that also had no problem with infanticide, especially of female babies).
It’s true that most people would not choose to have a handicapped child if given the choice of a healthy one. (Although there are plenty of people who would rather have a handicapped child then none at all and actually choose to adopt handicapped ones over healthy ones.)
So far, I have been blessed with the birth of three healthy children but only because I did not allow the doctors to scare me into aborting one of my perfectly healthy babies based on what they saw at my 20-week ultrasound. That is why with my current pregnancy I refuse to have an ultrasound until later in my pregnancy.
All children are a burden to some extent. And a lot of people out there can only see the burden whether the child is healthy or handicapped. They can’t see the joys, the love, how God uses our children to refine us into the person He knows that we can be.
But it all comes back to it’s either a person in there or it’s not a person. It is not a subjective call based on what a person wants in the moment or how much of a burden they think it’s going to be later. If quality of life is the standard by which we determine whether abortion should be allowed then where does it stop outside of the womb…and who gets to decide how quality gets measured?
Siaryls, would you also tell a mother who has a 9 year old child with rubella, or blindness, or partially crippled, that she should not want to keep her child and instead should consider euthanasia?
Is it really so difficult to imagine a mother loving her child no matter what physical disability he/she might have?
If a person is born with disabilities, they are here, they have to make the best of it, and we try to accommodate the disability to help them make the best of it. But there is nothing good about the disability. If the person concerned could get the disability taken away, most would do so. Disabilities are a pain, they hamper the person who has one, they put an extra strain on their relations with others, however accepting and loving.
Tell that to Gianna Jensen, abortion survivor who calls her cerebral palsy a “Gift from God”. She knows that there is merit in suffering, and she has said she is thankful for her cerebral palsy, as it has taught her many lessons in life.
Great Reminder of Gianna. Thanks Bethany. Here’s here website:
http://www.giannajessen.com/
Thanks, Gerard! From the site:
Gianna doesn’t believe that her Cerebral Palsy takes away her life, but, rather, enriches it. . . she walks with a slight limp today and runs marathons. On April 30, 2005 she completed her first 26.2 mile marathon after running just over 7 hours and was presented with the coveted blank blank award! On April 23, 2006 she completed the London Marathon as well. She is now determined to run marathons all over the place, because she was never supposed to even walk!
Siarlys Jenkins,
You are gravely mistaken. Individuals born with congenital or developmental disabilities (such as Autism, Cerebal Palsy, Down Syndrome, or Anecephaly) are no less human or any less of a person because of their disability. My husband was born with congenital disabilities (severe sensory processing disorder & moderate hearing loss) and I have had the honor of working with severely disabled children and young adults in an instutional setting for 2 years ( 40+ hours a day). Below are some stories of infants who passed from a fatal abnormality as well as children and adults living with moderate to profound mental retardation and other developmental disabilities.
Be Not Afraid
Be Not Afraid is an online outreach to parents who have received a poor or difficult prenatal diagnosis. The family stories, articles, and links within BeNotAfraid.net are presented as a resource for those who may have been asked to choose between terminating a pregnancy or continuing on despite the diagnosis. The BeNotAfraid.net families faced the same decision and chose not to terminate. By sharing their experiences, they hope to offer encouragement to those who may be afraid to continue on.
Faith Hope
A diagnosis of anencephaly has not stopped this young single mom from embracing every day, every moment, of her child’s life, who has lived beyond birth with this condition. A wonderful story of hope and encouragement for other mothers experiencing this devastating diagnosis.
99 Balloons
A video journal created by parents documenting the life of their son Elliot, who was born with Trisomy 18 and lived 99 days.
http://www.ninetynineballoons.com/
A Trisomy 18 Journey
Support website with information on Trisomy 18/Trisomy 13, personal stories, and resources for families, parents, and medical professionals.
Hidden Treasures: The Trisomy 21 Journey
Parents from all around the world, who would like to share their stories.
Mosaic Down Syndrome
Karlee has mosaic Down Syndrome. Her site also contains a whole page of family stories of other mosaic Down Syndrome children from around the world complete with e-mail links.
Video: Dreams
Dreams features children and adults who have Down syndrome talking about their dreams and what they’re proud of in their lives. This fun and inspirational video made by Scott and Julia Elliott celebrates the work of the National Down Syndrome Society and the larger Down syndrome community.
Video: Grace: A Story of a Family and Down Syndrome
Video: “My Wish”
A video made by a family about their son with Down Syndrome, Cole
All to often, when parents are faced with an adverse prental diagnosis, they are pressured to have an abortion by well-meaning doctors and family members and the only resource they are given is the number for an abortion provider. However, instead they should be given all their options and should be made known of the resources available to them (such as support groups for their particular condition, infant hospice care, fetal surgical procedures, etc). However, for those with non-fatal abnormalities (such as Down Syndrome), with advancements in medical technolgy, many congenital deformities can be corrected (such as the heart defect associated with Down Syndrome and excess cerebrospinal fluid associated with hydrocephalus) and combined with an appropriate educational support, behavioral modification, and assistance in learning daily living skills, many of these individuals can lead normal lives. Rather than shunning them, we should be embracing them and empowering them with tools to make the live the best life they can.
Well said Rachel!
I try to refrain from saying that the viewpoints expressed here are “gravely mistaken,” although they are viewpoints I would certainly not endorse. Some of the above comments seem to have missed that I drew a clear line between abortion and killing a live child — other acknowledged it, and asked what’s the difference.
If Gianna chooses to consider that cerebral palsy enriches her life, more power to her. After all, she has to live with it. If she had the power to cast a spell on a healthy baby by giving it the “gift” of cerebral palsy, to “enrich” its life, I would do anything in my power to stop her from doing so. I didn’t say that those born with such conditions are less human. I said that a developing fetus is NOT YET human, and therefore if the incidence of these diseases can be curtailed, that is a good thing.
barboo77, the reason its not OK to kill a baby at birth is because at birth, it is a baby. Actually, as I’ve said many times, once it is capable, if removed from the mother, of surviving on its own without hooking it up to heart lung machines and other contraptions, removal is a delivery, not an abortion.
Really, I am amazed at the number of people who are willing to put live children at risk, to make a point, when we all agree that they are live children, who should be protected.
I won’t run on at length on Gerard’s site. It is understood that he is obedient to the Magisterium. My position on how we can all live in the same country under the same law is posted here:
http://aleksandreia.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/disagreeing-about-life-and-death-in-a-free-republic/
“Actually, as I’ve said many times, once it is capable, if removed from the mother, of surviving on its own without hooking it up to heart lung machines and other contraptions, removal is a delivery, not an abortion.”
So, if a preterm baby is removed from its mother but is unable to survive without a heart/lung machine and other contraptions then it has been aborted? I’m sure there are plenty of parents of preemies interested in hearing that their babies were aborted.
And two minutes before removal a developing fetus is NOT YET human but two seconds after birth it magically becomes one? Or does the magical transformation happen in the birth canal? What about when the head is out but the body is not yet, are they human yet? Now there’s some objective science for you.
Two interesting side notes IMHO:
1. My 20-month-old saw the picture in the post of a fetus at 16-weeks-gestation and said, “Baby!! Baby!!”
2. My current fetus, christened “The Mystery Baby” by my other kids, is at 17 weeks gestation today. He or she is developing fingerprints as we speak, his/her own unique fingerprints which will distinguish him/her from every other human being on earth.
Barbara, the way that a baby magically transforms into a human being is when the doctor uses his magic wand in the shape of scissors to cut the umbilical cord and recites these words “with the power invested in me by Margaret Sanger I now pronounce you a human being!” The mystery is solved!
Gerard, wonderful blog BTW. Keep up the awesome work that you do.
“I would fully support her decision to abort if there were clear (not maybe 1%) evidence of Down’s syndrome” First of all—– OUCH!!!! Okay now that I said that….
Even an amnio does not give a 100% reading, so I guess he will never abort then right!
Mosaic Down syndrome really throws off the amnio as well. So I guess it is good to talk directly to God, Who is really the only one who knows for sure what the outcome will be.
Better yet, meet my daughter and all of her friends before you make such a rash decision. I promise you, she will not hurt you! In fact, she may just convert you into believing that all life is precious! She is really good at that!
Keep up the good work Gerard. Your saint, St. Gerard has always been very special to me!
As the mother of a child with Down syndrome, I find the description of her and people like her as some kind of diseased tissue extremely offensive.
Thanks Diane. St. Gerard is the reason why I made it through a very bad pregnancy. That’s why I got the whole name: Gerard Majella.
“I said that a developing fetus is NOT YET human, and therefore if the incidence of these diseases can be curtailed, that is a good thing.”
So far this IS the most illogical and inaccurate comment made on this new blog.
First off, the developing fetus IS most definitely HUMAN.
It is human because the mother and father have completely human DNA and can’t possibly conceive anything other than a “human” being.
What you actually mean to say Siarlys J. is that the human fetus is not yet a PERSON in your mind. Therefore, because it is not yet a person, we can do whatever we want to it or with it including killing it if it is diseased. Certainly the mark of an advanced civilization right?
By your own admission it only becomes a person when it is separate from the mother and “once it is capable, if removed from the mother, of surviving on its own without hooking it up to heart lung machines and other contraptions,…”
So by your definition, a comatose human needing a respirator is not a person. A preemie needing specialized machines such as incubators and oxygen is not a person.
What about a person undergoing heart surgery on a heart lung bypass machine?
Where do you draw the line Siarlys? Why stop at this definition?
Why not wait until 10 months after birth when the child can be more rigorously tested for genetic disorders and then the “disease curtailed”?
In my books, you belong in the same camp as Peter Singer.
Gentle Scholars,
Please let’s stay focussed on the issues and avoid sliding into nasty barbs.
Thank You
Thank you Gerard. I must say, I appreciate the humorous logic with which some of the intervening commentators have made their point — which I know is sincerely meant by each and every one.
Diane, I would love to meet your daughter. And believe me, abortion is not an issue for her, ever. You made a choice, and you are fully able to meet the joys and challenges of the choice you made. I’ve commented elsewhere that Roe v. Wade also protects YOUR right to make that choice, and forbids any government bureaucracy from ever trying to coerce you to make a different choice — even if Margaret Sanger were Secretary of Health.
Barbara, you seem to have missed that I explicitly denied that a baby two seconds before birth is not a person. That’s why the doctor doesn’t have to say magic words. There is a period of time before birth when, if removed, the baby could survive on its own — and we should allow plenty of leeway to make sure we are well back of that line. That won’t satisfy you, but criticize me for what I did say, not for what I didn’t say.
Parents who want every aid given to their preemies, no argument. One of my best friends was a preemie. Likewise, if the parents say, “please, no heart-lung machines or intrusive tubes, give them every chance to breath on their own and keep them comfortable, and we pray s/he lives, but if s/he can’t make it without machines, let God decide,” I would also support the right of those parents to make that choice. We don’t know enough, any of us, to set a bright line one size fits all rule for everyone. We will all make mistakes, but who is qualified to decree better?
As for adults on heart-lung machines, what I intend for myself is, if I am not capable of giving informed consent, and if that is a long-term condition (including dementia), no surgery, no machines, no tubes, let nature take its course. Nobody else has to give that instruction, we each get a choice, but that is mine, for myself. A week on a ventilator and I’m my old self again, that’s acceptable.
I do note that nobody has tried to answer my question about Gianna: if cerebral palsy enriches her life, should we find a way to give every baby cerebral palsy, so that all can have their lives enriched? No, I didn’t think so. So let Gianna work with the cards she was dealt in whatever way is best for her, God bless her, but don’t try to make her life a model for every parents’ painful choices.
“So let Gianna work with the cards she was dealt in whatever way is best for her, God bless her, but don’t try to make her life a model for every parents’ painful choices.”
except that Gianna’s life IS a model for other parents.
She is a model that demonstrates that the life of being disabled IS worth living.
She is a model that demonstrates the inherent dignity of ALL human persons regardless of their physical, emotional, mental condition.
She is a model that encourages us with hope for the future.
She demonstrates that children with disabilities are not all burdens. There is joy, accomplishment. Joy in even the smallest accomplishment which many parents take for granted or even overlook!
Gianna shows us that there is another way – a better way that is more humane, more human.
I disagree vehemently with your entire premise here, Siarlys.
I think that for many of these people who abort their disabled children they do so under the guise of charity but it is a false charity and compassion.
Death of another person to spare them suffering is never compassion. How can murdering a person be compassion?
And, I might also add, that many times doctors are completely wrong in their diagnosis and their prognosis for these children.
The internet is full of many such stories.
“There is a period of time before birth when, if removed, the baby could survive on its own — and we should allow plenty of leeway to make sure we are well back of that line.”
Again you are trying to draw a magical line in the sand. One day the baby can not survive without machines so it does not deserve protection but the next day it can so it does get protection. There is no way to know for any unborn baby when that magical day is exactly even when you know the exact date of conception. Every human born or unborn develops at a different rate. So who gets to play God and make the general decision of which unborn babies are protected and which ones aren’t?
Furthermore, the technology is such that preemies born earlier and earlier are able to be saved. So you better be prepared to keep readjusting that line of yours.
“Likewise, if the parents say, “please, no heart-lung machines or intrusive tubes, give them every chance to breath on their own and keep them comfortable, and we pray s/he lives, but if s/he can’t make it without machines, let God decide,” I would also support the right of those parents to make that choice.”
What you are describing is a natural death with the exception of being sure that the baby is receiving nutrition in order to have any chance of functioning on its own (every creature needs food and water to live). Miscarriage is also a natural death. However, abortion is NOT natural death. It is induced death by poison or trauma.
“if cerebral palsy enriches her life, should we find a way to give every baby cerebral palsy, so that all can have their lives enriched?”
Well, if the alternative is treating every person with a disability like non-human medical waste, then yes then we should give every baby a disability. We all work with the cards we are dealt with. Sometimes we know about these cards before birth and sometimes the cards are dealt later.
And most parents have no idea what they really are or aren’t sparing a disabled child from. You can’t fully know until the child is born or even years later how severe the disabilities can be even in a seemingly healthy child. Autism has a wide spectrum as do many other disabilities. And as we’ve said a million times ALL of the tests that they now offer prenatally are very unreliable–even amnios can give bad results.
“Well, if the alternative is treating every person with a disability like non-human medical waste, then yes then we should give every baby a disability. We all work with the cards we are dealt with. Sometimes we know about these cards before birth and sometimes the cards are dealt later.”
“And most parents have no idea what they really are or aren’t sparing a disabled child from. You can’t fully know until the child is born or even years later how severe the disabilities can be even in a seemingly healthy child. Autism has a wide spectrum as do many other disabilities. And as we’ve said a million times ALL of the tests that they now offer prenatally are very unreliable–even amnios can give bad results.”
very very good points, Barbara. 🙂
Cerebral palsy has a wide spectrum.
Down Syndrome too.
You are getting circular again. When you can score a debating point by comparing a badly damaged baby, getting access to heart-lung machines after being born, to a badly damaged fetus, which could conceivably be kept alive on heart-lung machines, you make the equation. But, when it suits the terms of your argument, you acknowledge that it is legitimate to allow a badly damaged baby to die a natural death, when they might survive a while longer on a heart-lung machine.
True, abortion is not a natural death. And a zygote is not a person, nor is a blastocyst, nor is an embryo, and at some stages, neither is a fetus. Yes, I am willing to draw a line. It is not magical, nor is it drawn in sand. The way to avoid “yesterday it could not survive, today it could” is to err on the side of caution, to leave a margin of error.
Now, your fundamental premise is that from the moment of conception, a person entitled to full protection of the law exists, while my premise is that no person exists until a baby has formed which is capable of existing outside of its mother’s womb. Don’t try to tell me that my premise is cruel because it IS a person, when my premise is, it is not a person. It isn’t cruel unless it is a person we are talking about, or unless you are a Buddhist, who wouldn’t destroy a paramecium if he could help it.
Finally, anyone willing to give every baby a disability to gain a pyrrhic victory for your side of an argument is morally comparable to Nazi doctors performing medical “experiments” on live human subjects. Get a grip on reality. A disability is not, in itself, a blessing, it is a curse. It is a DIS-ability. Prevention of disabilities is a good thing. Some people are born with disabilities, or acquire disabilities after birth. Those people are still people, still loveable, entitled to live their lives as best they can, and even find enrichment in their disability if it is available. But in no way shape or form should we mistake that disability for something desirable, much less to be propagated in others.